Reintroducing Superman: An Open Discussion

[DavidTyler]

Hell with it.... let the studio give me 50 mil and I'll make a Superman film that will make fandom (for the most part) happy and set up a franchise that will have legs.

It's not that friggin complicated.

Do a total reboot.

Start from the beginning and make Krypton more interesting than the Donner version.

Touch a little on his smallville experiences - enough so you get an idea of what shaped him - including at least one bad experience that caused him to be a very cautious adult.

Let us see a bit of his travels around the world and touch on maybe one incident that shaped him... I'm thinking the African scene from Birthright (the only part of that book worth anything)

Let him arrive at the costume and name in a believable way ( I would borrow from MOS)

Let him have his first interaction with Corrupt Corporate Shark Luthor.

Set up a sequel in the closing minutes of the first film and hint that it's something spectacular ... like Brainiac or something similar.


Make sure all the characters are up to date, not hokey or cartoony, and relatable. Like Jimmy and Perry being who they are in the animated series.

That would do it. It's a film that would work and capture the gp as well as fandom.

Why is Hollywood making this so difficult?

 

[mego joe]

Braniac was always an alien entity, but it was STAS that connected him to Krypton. I suppose they can go with the original origins, but the latter provides a much more potent connection to the hero, which is always the best.

Well the first Braniac story did involve the Bottled City of Kandor from KRypton, so there's always been some connection of BRainiac to Krypton. YOu wouldn't necessarily have to include it, but it would make for a good story I believe.

FTR, Brainiac was created by Otto Binder- no connection to S/S.

 

[VenomsMom]

It's not that friggin complicated.

Your right......its not. And its the simplest approach. Yet so frustrating.

 

[GreenKToo]

Hell with it.... let the studio give me 50 mil and I'll make a Superman film that will make fandom (for the most part) happy and set up a franchise that will have legs.

It's not that friggin complicated.

Do a total reboot.

Start from the beginning and make Krypton more interesting than the Donner version.

Touch a little on his smallville experiences - enough so you get an idea of what shaped him - including at least one bad experience that caused him to be a very cautious adult.

Let us see a bit of his travels around the world and touch on maybe one incident that shaped him... I'm thinking the African scene from Birthright (the only part of that book worth anything)

Let him arrive at the costume and name in a believable way ( I would borrow from MOS)

Let him have his first interaction with Corrupt Corporate Shark Luthor.

Set up a sequel in the closing minutes of the first film and hint that it's something spectacular ... like Brainiac or something similar.


Make sure all the characters are up to date, not hokey or cartoony, and relatable. Like Jimmy and Perry being who they are in the animated series.

That would do it. It's a film that would work and capture the gp as well as fandom.

Why is Hollywood making this so difficult?

maybe because they have reimagining on the brain. I guess they've never heard the term, ''if it ain't broke, don't fix it''.
The film part of Superman is broke of course, but not the source material.

 

[The Guard]

$50 million dollars?

I'd like to see that.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Nobody could do a liveaction Superman movie for 50mil.

 

[nintendo nerd]

Hell with it.... let the studio give me 50 mil and I'll make a Superman film that will make fandom (for the most part) happy and set up a franchise that will have legs.

It's not that friggin complicated.

Do a total reboot.

Start from the beginning and make Krypton more interesting than the Donner version.

Touch a little on his smallville experiences - enough so you get an idea of what shaped him - including at least one bad experience that caused him to be a very cautious adult.

Let us see a bit of his travels around the world and touch on maybe one incident that shaped him... I'm thinking the African scene from Birthright (the only part of that book worth anything)

Let him arrive at the costume and name in a believable way ( I would borrow from MOS)

Let him have his first interaction with Corrupt Corporate Shark Luthor.

Set up a sequel in the closing minutes of the first film and hint that it's something spectacular ... like Brainiac or something similar.


Make sure all the characters are up to date, not hokey or cartoony, and relatable. Like Jimmy and Perry being who they are in the animated series.

That would do it. It's a film that would work and capture the gp as well as fandom.

Why is Hollywood making this so difficult?

You are gonna make a Superman TV Movie?

You are saying you can make a 50 million Superman movie? And that most people would like it? LOL. Good look with that. You and Timstuff are the most arrogant people on this boards, by far.

 

[KalMart]

Ouch.

 

[nintendo nerd]

Hey Tyler, here's your cast for your Superman movie. Now you just have to worry about the script and the visual effects because this cast is cheap as hell.

 

[BestGirl]

Why is Hollywood making this so difficult?

At this point, I think it's the lawsuit that's making things so difficult.

 

[BestGirl]

As far as the origin part....Krypton, Smallville, et al...I dunno, I think they might be able to save that for the second movie if there is one, dedicating more of the restart to reintroducing Superman being Superman. Maybe a few small glimpses of his origin, instead of a big chunk of the first act, like most origin films.

It depends on what you mean about saving the origin, but I would rather they just go the traditional route and get the origin out of the way in the first movie and amp up the action in the second.

Besides, I like the idea of watching Superman grow from movie to movie. TDK was great, but would have suffered if we hadn't seen Batman develop his one rule or his relationship with Rachel in BB. Our knowledge of who Batman is and what he believes and wants made the events of TDK more poignant.

I want to see what motivates Clark to become Superman, his first rescue, his mistakes, all those things that help build a character.

 

[KalMart]

It depends on what you mean about saving the origin, but I would rather they just go the traditional route and get the origin out of the way in the first movie and amp up the action in the second.

That's kinda' what I mean in terms of how to use the origin....in that instead of 'getting it out of the way', we can get more meat out of it by using it as a more parallel storyline...a la Godfather II...with the threat of the second movie also being tied in with krypton's destruction, etc. It might help to broaden the scope of the story over two worlds and so on, instead of having to get it over with within 10-15 minutes.

Besides, I like the idea of watching Superman grow from movie to movie. TDK was great, but would have suffered if we hadn't seen Batman develop his one rule or his relationship with Rachel in BB. Our knowledge of who Batman is and what he believes and wants made the events of TDK more poignant.

I like the idea of watching him grow as well, as I'm sure real Superman fans do. But I think it will be more effective if you draw more people in with a new Superman experience first, having them invest in that more before delving deeper into his past, heritage, and what not.

I want to see what motivates Clark to become Superman, his first rescue, his mistakes, all those things that help build a character.

So do I...eventually. But there's also something to be said for taking a little different approach/angle to it without necessarily having to change it....in fact, getting more out of it in a more unique package. I'm hoping that a new Superman movie...in addition to showing us a new take on Superman...would also give us a new take on telling his story, in a way that's unexpected compared to the more linear traditional approach without getting gimmicky or too experimental.

 

[BestGirl]

That's kinda' what I mean in terms of how to use the origin....in that instead of 'getting it out of the way', we can get more meat out of it by using it as a more parallel storyline...a la Godfather II...with the threat of the second movie also being tied in with krypton's destruction, etc. It might help to broaden the scope of the story over two worlds and so on, instead of having to get it over with within 10-15 minutes.

Okay.

I like the idea of watching him grow as well, as I'm sure real Superman fans do. But I think it will be more effective if you draw more people in with a new Superman experience first, having them invest in that more before delving deeper into his past, heritage, and what not.

Not more effective for the first movie. With no background, Superman's just a nice guy in a weird costume who saves people for some reason. Though I suppose they could just do what Burton did and substitute the occasional flashback in place of a full-blown origin.

So do I...eventually. But there's also something to be said for taking a little different approach/angle to it without necessarily having to change it....in fact, getting more out of it in a more unique package. I'm hoping that a new Superman movie...in addition to showing us a new take on Superman...would also give us a new take on telling his story, in a way that's unexpected compared to the more linear traditional approach without getting gimmicky or too experimental.

I can understand this. What with BB, SM, IM, GL, and who knows what other heroes in the future I can't blame anyone who's getting a little origined out and wants a more unique approach to telling SUpes's story.

 

[Showtime]

I honestly can't take it anymore.

All this thread is, is general discussion. I like the original intention of the poster who opened the thread. However all it is, is posters passive aggressively taking shots at Superman Returns, marketing discussions, director discussions. This all can be talked about in the open discussion thread. That is where it is going.

 

[MadVillainy]

I dont really see this as a general discussion
Of course we go on tangents as all threads do but Ive seen alot of comments about the origin debate which has to do with reintroducing Supes. ANd then about all the lawsuit comments I think they also have relevance because the lawsuit could have a role in how Superman is reintroduced

 

[Showtime]

So you think that belongs in some type of Star Trek thread?

 

[KalMart]

Okay.



Not more effective for the first movie. With no background, Superman's just a nice guy in a weird costume who saves people for some reason. Though I suppose they could just do what Burton did and substitute the occasional flashback in place of a full-blown origin.

I think generally, people are familiar enough with the fact that Supes comes from a different planet and all, which could easily be alluded to once the world (in that movie) starts to learn more bout him. So in that respect, people don't HAVE to see it to get what's going on. And as I said earlier....if you view it from the perspective of the people in that world.....he suddenly shows up out of nowhere and blows everyone's mind. They don't know his origins and what have you....to them the world is a normal place...until he shows up with no warning. That's the kind of perspective I'd like the audience to have in the first film, the sudden arrival of a phenomenon....instead of having the traditional 'inside story' from the outset. That we can save for later. It'd be a different spin on things, and it could make the film more unique in that respect.

I can understand this. What with BB, SM, IM, GL, and who knows what other heroes in the future I can't blame anyone who's getting a little origined out and wants a more unique approach to telling SUpes's story.

It could be cool.

 

[KalMart]

Or they could just do it like Star Trek.

 

[GreenKToo]

I think we all have our own thoughts about we want and don't want in the next film, but I think we can all agree on one thing, and that is that we ALL want a goosebump inducing reintroduction next time around.
A film that will leave us smiling and saying I"VE GOT to see THAT again.

 

[Showtime]

I think you wanted my comment on McTeigue.

I think McTeigue was involved in talks at one point, I think he isn't now. Usually if somebody is involved they don't openly talk about what they would or wouldn't do.

 

[batman strikes]

I really like Kalmart's idea of telling the origin in two movies. You have the first one basically be all about Clark Kent and his travels, Smallville, and explaining why he chooses the disguise he does. Then you have the introductions in Metropolis with Lex Luthor, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, and the first appearance of Superman. You can have villains like Parasite and Metallo so the action wouldn't be lacking. The second movie you can start on Krypton and introduce Brainiac, Jor-El, Lara and baby Kal-El. Then when the planet explodes we cut to 30 years later where Brainiac comes to earth and terrorizes the people and then Superman saves the day. Basically the whole second movie would be about Superman finding out who he is and where he came from. Of course he would know he was an alien in the first film but he just doesn't know where until the second. I know that’s a really brief and crude explanation but if done right it could be really cool.

 

[The Guard]

I've toyed with that in writing treatments.

It's different, though, because I think the first movie should deal with Superman's motivations, at least in terms of becoming Superman, but not his actual origins. I really think Clark shouldn't know where he came from until the second film.

I envision a second film revealing bit by bit about Krypton's past, and hence, Superman's, until finally, Superman discovers Braniac's role in some sort of "bottle city" scheme on Krypton, and sees him for what he is, as well as realizing just what's out there in the universe.

A third movie would deal with Zod, Argo City, Kandor, and potentially Kara, with appropriate flashbacks if needed.

Here's the thing. Audiences are familiar with Superman being from another planet. I'm not sure I want Clark to be. I think it would have a LOT more impact if this guy doesn't know where he's from, or where he gets his powers, if the Kents don't even know. Maybe he's a god, maybe he's an angel, a mutant, an experiment, etc. And he discovers it after he's not only established himself as a human being, but also as Superman. That way, you don't have an essential rehash of the Donner "use your special heritage to become Superman" element, but the Krypton stuff still has punch.

 

[batman strikes]

I actually love that idea. Because like you said you are dealing with Clark Kent/Superman's motivation in the first film and you can spend the whole movie delving deeper into that. It's different but ultimately you will be getting the same information that we all want to see in the reboot it would just be splitting it up into two films.

 

[MaskedManJRK]

$50 million dollars?

I'd like to see that.

To be fair, we recently saw that it can be done on a smaller level with District 9. There weren't any stars and was probably okayed because no one thought it would get as big an opening as it got, but we have seen that you can make a CGI-extensive sci-fi film for under 50 million.

I don't see it happening, but I wouldn't object if someone like D9's director got the helm.

 

[KalMart]

Don't you think he'd like to be able to work with more than $50M, though?